search

rtcweb-wg / rtcweb-transport

draft-ietf-rtcweb-transport
2 stars 2 forks source link

Congestion control guidance #43

Closed alvestrand closed 7 years ago

alvestrand commented 7 years ago

From Mirja Kuehlewind in IESG review:

Section 4.1 Local Prioritization

This section describes the resource allocations that are expected for prioritized different streams when there is congestion. There are two highly relevant congestion control documents that are approved (or nearly so), and I can't see that the RTCWB WG considered them from my quick review of mailing list discussions, but it would be a good idea for this draft to call them out:

draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-17 - this has enough positions to pass and is waiting for an AD followup (looks like for the IANA re-review after a version change). It puts some additional considerations on flows that are likely to be relevant to the flows in the present draft.

alvestrand commented 7 years ago

Comment from Colin Perkins:

This is listed as “MUST implement” in draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-26, which is referenced from Section 3.5 of the rtcweb-transport draft.

alvestrand commented 7 years ago

From Mirja Kuehlewind, text suggestion:

rtcweb-transport says "For transport of media, secure RTP is used. The details of the profile of RTP used are described in "RTP Usage“ [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage]."

Given that this doc is called "Transports for WebRTC“, I would appreciate if it says slightly more about the recommendations given in rtcweb-rtp-usage, especialy regarding congestion control.

What’s about the following?

"For transport of media, secure RTP is used. The details of the profile of RTP used are described in "RTP Usage“ [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage], which mandates the use of a circuit breaker [draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-17] and congestion control (see [draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements-09] for further guidance).“

alvestrand commented 7 years ago

Note added in #16